Trouble logging in?If you can't remember your password or are having trouble logging in, you will have to reset your password. If you have trouble resetting your password (for example, if you lost access to the original email address), please do not start posting with a new account, as this is against the forum rules. If you create a temporary account, please contact us right away via Forum Support, and send us any information you can about your original account, such as the account name and any email address that may have been associated with it.

In the Ryukishi interview he said the truth Battler realized was that he fully understood the "who, how, and why". This implies that all the readers should understand this by now as well. Mabye some people understand everything but I sure don't.

My point exactly.

Everyone should understand everything by now, but I haven't met or heard of anyone that has a single theory that explains everything.

I think Ryukishi is lying. Again.

Quote:

Originally Posted by k//eternal

What's the problem? If you don't like my wording, I could say they actually are logical instead, but since you apparently don't think that anyone has written a reasonable explanation (which begs to invoke a Devil's Proof), it's probably better as is.

Eh, the explanations are reasonable and logical in some ways, but I don't think anyone has really come up with a decent motive...

Quote:

Originally Posted by k//eternal

Honestly, there's less of a problem as far as coming up with decent explanations is concerned and more of one in reducing them to a single answer. It's like being given a multiple choice exam, but several of the answers look valid despite only one being correct.

Yuuuuuup. We have so many answers and differing opinions that it's impossible to understand which one is right.

Ideally we should have an epiphany like Battler did, but... I haven't met anyone who has.

Yes, yes, Devil's Proof, but you'd think the Internet would have heard of it by now.

Everyone should understand everything by now, but I haven't met anyone that has a single theory that explains everything.

Ergo, Ryukishi is lying. Again.

First off, Ryuukishi has said before that the "why" might not be guessable. In most mysteries, the "why" is an added bonus on top of catching the culprit: having a motive doesn't make one guilty. If you take away the why, then yes, there are several theories which, when put together, explain every single event in the question arcs.

As he's shown time and again when describing the blue text, the point isn't finding a single "true" theory, it's all about making as many guesses as you can think of and hoping one hits. Some theories will have more support from the text than others, and he's repeatedly mentioned that he's included hints to help you confirm whether your theory is more likely or not.

It could be the reason we haven't found a more satisfying answer is that we haven't looked hard enough. I don't think the new info in EP5 has been completely sorted through yet.

__________________

"The only moral it is possible to draw from this story is that one should never throw the letter 'q' into a privet bush. But, unfortunately, there are times when it is unavoidable."
--Hitchhikers

First off, Ryuukishi has said before that the "why" might not be guessable. In most mysteries, the "why" is an added bonus on top of catching the culprit: having a motive doesn't make one guilty. If you take away the why, then yes, there are several theories which, when put together, explain every single event in the question arcs.

But the "why" is always the most important thing. Means motive opportunity. The most likely person is always the killer.

Even if we have theories that explain everything, if we don't have the "why", we don't know if they're true or not. And if we don't know for certain, they might as well be false...

And that doesn't explain why he just implied that the mystery should be fully solvable at this point, i.e. we should be at the same stage as Battler. Like I said, without "why" our theories are meaningless.

Until everything clicks we have nothing.

Quote:

Originally Posted by chronotrig

It could be the reason we haven't found a more satisfying answer is that we haven't looked hard enough.

But the "why" is always the most important thing. Means motive opportunity. The most likely person is always the killer.

Even if we have theories that explain everything, if we don't have the why, we don't know if they're true or not. And if we don't know for certain, they might as well be false...

And that doesn't explain why he just implied that the mystery should be fully solvable at this point, i.e. we should be at the same stage as Battler. Like I said, without "why" our theories are meaningless.

Until everything clicks we have nothing.

While "the most likely person is always the killer" is often true in real life, it's almost never the case in mystery novels. Just because someone has a really good reason to commit murder doesn't mean they did it, and even a person with a weaker motive can be the criminal. Furthermore, with the family headship and all that gold on the line, everyone arguably has an incredibly large motive to commit any individual crime.
Also, there are plenty of excellent mystery novels where the motive isn't truly revealed until the end...including Umineko's favorite, "And then there were none".

By the way, Ryuukishi never said we had to "know what Battler knows", nor was he specific about what Battler has actually learned. Nowhere did he say that there should be a single answer for us to find that is obviously the truth. From the way he describes it, it looks like even Battler has a ways to go before he can prove that he's really understood everything.

Edit: Oh, and as proof he isn't lying, he spent the whole last quarter of the interview talking about the trusting relationship that's needed between the writer and the reader. He's not going to say something like that and then flat out lie in the same interview.

__________________

"The only moral it is possible to draw from this story is that one should never throw the letter 'q' into a privet bush. But, unfortunately, there are times when it is unavoidable."
--Hitchhikers

While "the most likely person is always the killer" is often true in real life, it's almost never the case in mystery novels. Just because someone has a really good reason to commit murder doesn't mean they did it, and even a person with a weaker motive can be the criminal.

You've never read Poirot, have you?

Agatha Christie's philosophy on mysteries was that, yes, the most likely person WAS always the killer. (Poirot kept mocking famous mystery novels of his time, specifically Conan Doyle's work.) The trick with the Poirot novels was in obscuring who was the most likely person.

I think a similar trick is at work here.

Quote:

Originally Posted by chronotrig

Furthermore, with the family headship and all that gold on the line, everyone arguably has an incredibly large motive to commit any individual crime.

Money is, frankly, an uninteresting motive ( >_> ) and it's not a motive to kill EVERYONE. (Unless you're trying to obscure who you're trying to kill.) Also, most of the adults have a tendency to die in the first twilight, so it really couldn't be them killing for money... Could be George though...

Quote:

Originally Posted by chronotrig

Also, there are plenty of excellent mystery novels where the motive isn't truly revealed until the end...including Umineko's favorite, "And then there were none".

Actually, And Then There Were None is kind of a hackjob of a mystery story... the ending is just so... blah.

It's hardly a mystery as it is so much a suspense novel.

Quote:

Originally Posted by chronotrig

By the way, Ryuukishi never said we had to "know what Battler knows", nor was he specific about what Battler has actually learned. Nowhere did he say that there should be a single answer for us to find that is obviously the truth. From the way he describes it, it looks like even Battler has a ways to go before he can prove that he's really understood everything.

I will give you this and admit that I am wrong, yes. "Lying" was the wrong word.

Edit: Oh, and as proof he isn't lying, he spent the whole last quarter of the interview talking about the trusting relationship that's needed between the writer and the reader. He's not going to say something like that and then flat out lie in the same interview.

...Are you sure?

I fail to consider, say, Ep3 an example of a trusting relationship between writer and reader. The omniscient narration is lying in that episode...

Battler can't use golden truth to death against Erika, because then, Erika wins. His situation right now is the same at the end of EP5, when he can't spam the truth because that will give Bernkastel the victory, that's why Bern wasn't afraid of him when he "resurrected". But then he used a fake theory to crush Erika's one.

Until Beato comes back, Battler can't state the truth. Battler wants to end his and Beato's game, not this new one. But he must make Erika surrender to do that.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kaisos Erranon

...Are you sure?

I fail to consider, say, Ep3 an example of a trusting relationship between writer and reader. The omniscient narration is lying in that episode...

On the other hand, EP3 is full of hints.

It's an episode made to save the people who after EP2, lost their ways.

Well I think it's quite clear from the context, that Battler didn't change his mind one bit. He's not going to claim magic exists just because he became a "majutsushi". He will still try to prove everything was done with human tricks. He will keep his promise, he will kill "Beatrice". That's also Beatrice's wish.

The most surprising part of this interview to me is the fact that Ryukishi confirmed that Battler knows who, how and why committed the crimes. This seems to good to be true. Too early.
I think Ryukishi is going to show us Battler's game with a prefect and plausible solution making us believe that it is finally the truth because Battler of course understood everything... only to make a plot twist in the end and show us it was all wrong.

I'm curious to see how Erika is going to act against Battler's game, and why the hell Bern should go against Battler, since technically Battler winning means she also wins. Pride? Or maybe she really doesn't want the game to end?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kaisos Erranon

My point exactly.

Everyone should understand everything by now, but I haven't met or heard of anyone that has a single theory that explains everything.

I think Ryukishi is lying. Again.

Yuuuuuup. We have so many answers and differing opinions that it's impossible to understand which one is right.

Ideally we should have an epiphany like Battler did, but... I haven't met anyone who has.

Yes, yes, Devil's Proof, but you'd think the Internet would have heard of it by now.

I don't think Ryukishi is lying, but I do think that he's got a biased perspective of what is good hint. Of course this is common with many mystery authors, they tend to place hints here and there and then in the end explain: you see I left you a hint here, you should have understood everything from that. But the truth is from a rational standpoint that hint wasn't a good hint at all and it could have led to many other possibilities not just the right one.

I hope this is not the case with Ryukishi, but I'm prepared to something like that, I've just a had a little taste of that with the epitaph.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kaisos Erranon

Actually, And Then There Were None is kind of a hackjob of a mystery story... the ending is just so... blah.

It's hardly a mystery as it is so much a suspense novel.

You know I've only recently read "and then there were none" and it left me with the same identical impression XD. Good story but very lackluster ending. The major flaw of that story is that there could have been a thousands of things that could have gone wrong with the mastermind's plan, and the fact that everything followed the script perfectly makes me think there was Bernkastel behind it all.

Also those that were showed as "hints" at the end were simply ridiculous except one.

Let us just hope the similarities with Umineko will not go beyond the secluded island closed circle and the announced serial murder.

Quote:

Originally Posted by sento

Battler can't use golden truth to death against Erika, because then, Erika wins. His situation right now is the same at the end of EP5, when he can't spam the truth because that will give Bernkastel the victory, that's why Bern wasn't afraid of him when he "resurrected". But then he used a fake theory to crush Erika's one.

Until Beato comes back, Battler can't state the truth. Battler wants to end his and Beato's game, not this new one. But he must make Erika surrender to do that.

On the other hand, EP3 is full of hints.

It's an episode made to save the people who after EP2, lost their ways.

I totally disagree with what you are saying here.
If Erika will try to win using the truth, why Battler should have anything against that?

The reason Battler strongly opposed Erika in Ep5 was because Erika was trying to frame the wrong person. It should be noted that Battler didn't try to deny Erika's reasoning regardless of them being true. He wasn't even really against her at all in the beginning. To think that Battler would oppose her just because he doesn't want her to win, is very childish and absolutely not like Battler. Also Ryukishi has stated without any doubt that Battler's objective hasn't changed at all. He will try to expose the truth, he will not cover it.

I think Ep6 will show Battler trying to expose the truth and Erika trying to frame again another innocent.

I totally disagree with what you are saying here.
If Erika will try to win using the truth, why Battler should have anything against that?

The reason Battler strongly opposed Erika in Ep5 was because Erika was trying to frame the wrong person. It should be noted that Battler didn't try to deny Erika's reasoning regardless of them being true. He wasn't even really against her at all in the beginning. To think that Battler would oppose her just because he doesn't want her to win, is very childish and absolutely not like Battler. Also Ryukishi has stated without any doubt that Battler's objective hasn't changed at all. He will try to expose the truth, he will not cover it.

I think Ep6 will show Battler trying to expose the truth and Erika trying to frame again another innocent.

You got me totally wrong. I didn't said that Erika will try to win using the truth, I said that Battler now is "the witch", so he will lose if he spam the truth to death. That was the point on the EP5 last stand in the ura tea party. He's in the same place as Beato right now, his role right now is to make Erika surrender, and then bring back Beato's game and end it once for all.

Of course, as Ryuukishi said, even if Battler is the Game-Master, that don't means that he is anti-mystery now. I think that in EP6, Battler will construct a truth based mystery-game to crush Erika. At least, that's what they implied at EP5 end.

But imho the only reason Battler used fake theories in Ep5 was because he wanted to save Natsuhi, not because he wanted Erika to lose. He had no other way to achieve that because the game was very unfair. If he could I have no doubt that he would have used the truth to defeat Erika and not a lie.

Now that he achieved that goal and he's the gamemaster, I don't understand why he should try to cover the truth. He already got the game back. Erika is his enemy as long as she tries to frame innocent people. But if she is going to find the truth, why Battler would want to stop her?

I think your premise is that the game become BattlerVSErika so the two must be necessarily in opposition. But before Battler woke up, it was Erika who was supposed to be the gamemaster, and there wasn't really any opponent then, and yet the game was supposed to start anyway. This means this game isn't necessarily a 1vs1 game. If the game could exist regardless of Battler's presence, the game can exist regardless of Erika's presence. Erika's presence in Battler's game is just a nuisance not a necessary element. That's why I think Battler will pursue his objective regardless of Erika.

I don't think there is a problem here. Battler arrived to the solution through his logic and reasoning, not because of chance or a sixth sense.

Ryukishi said that all the elements to solve the mystery were available since the end of episode4, so it can be assumed that Battler made use of those, and probably he was helped by some memories which we aren't fully aware of.

Nothing in the sixth rule prevents the detective from realizing all the truth in a single instant.

But imho the only reason Battler used fake theories in Ep5 was because he wanted to save Natsuhi, not because he wanted Erika to lose. He had no other way to achieve that because the game was very unfair. If he could I have no doubt that he would have used the truth to defeat Erika and not a lie.

Then doesn't make sense why Bern was "beh, Battler resurrected, not a problem, we can beat him".

The last image of EP5 is Battler sprite clashing with Erika sprite. They already said that Battler will be the one in EP6 to construct the game, Erika wants to face him and kill him and he needs to eliminate the external factors, Erika and Bern. Imho, he's far for got the game back.

A game is made of two opponents, and Beato is not here. That's a point here in EP5. And no, Lambda-Bern hijack is not a fair game, so the whole "I Erika the Gamemaster Witch of truth will solve the next EPs without an opponent" is not valid.

EP6 will probably be a Battler VS Erika. At least, that's what it seems more logical with the stuff they said at the end of EP5.

Since Bern said that it can be assumed that Bern plans to beat him with something different than the truth.

Also if Bern was assuming Battler would try to create a fake game, the fact that he knows the truthwouldn't matter. No I think Bern is taking for granted that Battler will try to create a game with the purpose of disclosing the truth.

However I really do not understand why Bern doesn't like that. Why Bern wants to win by framing innocent people? It seems she only care about denying magic and witches, but at the same time she doesn't want the real truth to come out in the open.

Another thing that is hard to explain is how should it difficult for Battler to win considering the situation. He can create a game where the truth is apparent, but I guess that's what will make Episode6 interesting. How will Bern and Erika manage to find proof to back their false theories?

Anyway as you can see I do not disagree with the fact that we will see Battler vs Erika, however I do not think that Battler telling the truth will help Erika, because Erika has already proven in Ep5 that she doesn't care about the truth.
Battler will state the truth, and Erika will try to cover it with lies. However I don't have any clue on how this could happen. If Battler can use red he can deny any theory Erika will make without worrying about anything.

Well, I don't think that Bern and Erika want to win by framing innocent people... But it's easier, so they don't care. I see them as Ryuukishi's way to say that "without love, you can't see the truth".

If by pure chance Erika and Bern find the truth, I think that they will use it to win, but as they can't find it, deshumanizing mystery aproach stuff ensues.

I don't think that Bern plans to beat him with something different than the truth... I think that she doesn't care about the truth in the first place, and only wants to win at any cost. So, for Bern, truth it's secondary.

However it is a fact that Battler said in red that Natsuhi wasn't the culprit. Even if Dlanor disallowed him to make use of that red truth, that red truth was said and there was no doubt it was true. Erika and Bern simply decided to disregard it. Not only that, they didn't seem to be surprised by it, as if they knew already.

Anyway let us assume that Bern and Erika will try to win with the truth and accusing the right person (which I doubt because this would be the 6th game, and the culprit won't be revealed yet, not even in a theory), I don't get why Battler should try to stop them.

It is true that what Battler wants is to win in a way that is satisfactory for Beatrice. But isn't finding the truth the core itself of such a satisfactory win? Or rather... why Battler needs to waste time with Erika? This is a game between Beatrice and Battler, Erika has nothing to do with it. Which is why I think Battler will create this game regardless of her and he will only fight against her because she will get in the way.

Yeah but why Battler needs to waste time with Erika? Can't he just solve the riddle? Actually as Ryukishi said, he already solved it. Now he only needs to create a game and prove his own theories. That's what Ryukishi himself said.

To do that I don't get why Erika is necessary... at all. If Erika was the gamemaster yeah that would make sense. But since she isn't, what's her role except being a nuisance?

Quote:

at the end of Episode 5, Battler reaches the fundamental truth behind "who, for what purpose, and why". If he can lay that bare, he will win. So, if we liken it to chess, Battler actually hasn't yet made a move to achieve checkmate. The process that will lead to a checkmate has only been formulated in his mind. So, according to our plans at the present, Episode 6 will be a tale about proving whether Battler actually did reach all the way to the truth. He will actually make and carry out the moves he has thought of. In other words, Battler becoming the Game Master "proves that he has understood everything about the world of Umineko".

See I'm not mistaking it. Ryukishi told us that Battler's objective is to lay bare the truth, not preventing Erika from winning.

Yeah but why Battler needs to waste time with Erika? Can't he just solve the riddle? Actually as Ryukishi said, he already solved it. Now he only needs to create a game and prove his own theories. That's what Ryukishi himself said.

To do that I don't get why Erika is necessary... at all. If Erika was the gamemaster yeah that would make sense. But since she isn't, what's her role except being a nuisance?

It takes two to play a chess game.

Erika's presence is apparently a big hint, along with Dlanor. I'm sure she has some use.